deleted by creator

Well, can’t guarantee that he can maintain the record over the next few months, but currently Biden holds the record.

Interesting analogy I have found. There is a plethora of psychology and sociology studies that show that children in abusive relationships end up hating the parent that refuses to stand up to the abusive parent more than the parent doing the abusing. Even if the child wouldn’t phrase it this way, there is an acceptance that abusive alcoholics exist. It is the supposedly good and sober parent letting it happen and enabling it that generates the greatest anger and hatred in the child.

Hating the government is right and good. The problem is the crushing of the left, the popular front, and the Democrats taking up all space for opposition to the Republicans, while wanting to be “polite Republicans” and maintaining the status quo above all else is what gave opening for hating the government to take this reactionary form.

It is never the party’s job to appeal to voters. There is one designated party that is just owed support and should never have to craft another appeal besides “The Republicans can’t fill out the paperwork properly, that is why we will build the wall faster, put people in concentration camps at greater numbers, and do fascism better and more politely than the dumb, knuckle-dragging fascists”

No, Democrats and Liberals using Trump 2 as an excuse to be vocally pro-genocide and forcing people to accept pro-fascism is what caused Trump 2, since the party cannot fail only be failed by voters willing to accept fascism but not turned off by crude, ham-fisted forms of fascism. The problem, supposedly, is people that oppose Trump’s policies, rather than just needing the Trump policies being polite. It is the Democrat’s need to always adopt all of the previous Republican policies, and their only goal is being the Republicans, but polite. If Genocide and fascism is not a red line, but completely acceptable to support, as long as you can imagine another regime doing the genocide slightly worse, there is no evil you will not work for and support.

The difference between communism and anarchism isn’t the aims, but whether the state could immediately be abolished or that there must be a transitional period.

It is not that there isn’t some flow both ways, but that the material conditions is much more dominant than people coming up with ideas and mechanations moving things in ways contradicting the conditions. The system setting the conditions is in fact dominant. The way corruption and self-dealing manifests is different between where you can just create a private corporation and lobby for a government contract to justify being given a 500 million dollars of tax payer money, versus trying to massage Gosplan to syphon off several million Rubles of excess spending, versus tricking a sovereign wealth fund to hand over several billion dollars for some supposed innovative building company to create innovations for Neom.

The fact that it is attributed to a very few actors and not a literal, singular actor does not negate great man theory.

The issue is that this is arbitrarily flattening of the actual material conditions. You can point out that nearly all political systems, on a long enough timeline lead to some form of collapse (Joseph Tainter is a good reference on this). But all of these things are dependent, not independent, of the systems and conditions they find themselves in. The timescales and forms can vary drastically depending on the material conditions actors find themselves in.

We are seeing the capitalist West’s descent into fascism. The direct proof of the 1930’s maxim, “fascism is capitalism in decay” between the AFD, Orban, Erdogan, Starmer being basically indistinguishable from a Tory, Macron pulling a Hindenburg by using the presidential power to appoint a prime minister that will unify the center-right liberals with the far-right to prevent the left from having any power in government, and Meloni being an acceptable, reasonable western leader because she follows through with whatever US foreign policy is on offer. We are seeing a direct breakdown because of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall (law of diminishing returns, applied to profit, if you are a child that believes in neoclassical economics). So profit has to be sought out by purely national protectionism and reshoring since there is not a growing pie, but you just have to claim a greater slice of the pie. Capitalism on any sufficient timescale is Fascism, the destruction of WW2 and the Marshall Plan reset this “diminishing return on profitability” so that we are reaching the same state of the 1920s. But since there isn’t a strong socialist movement we have to modify Gramsci’s assessment. “The old world is dying, a new one is completely stillborn, now and forever is the time of monsters”

Communism by any other name would smell as sweet

Indonesia, Chile, West Germany, Congo, Iran, Bengal, Guatemala, Nicaragua…

If you believe in great man theory™ and think that all political developments happen because one person can magically steer entire countries and the world, in geo-political terms, or idealists in thinking that if you have the correct ideas, you can magically steer the entire rest of the world to whatever you think, by having the correct thoughts. Then your theories of political developments are non-materialist, like this comment is objecting to. The system sets the conditions of who is going to be empowered or rewarded for their actions and positions.

I don’t have a list of specific instances on hand. But he was kind of a contrarian voice for a while that I listened to over a decade ago, but in 2016 went in the more anti-woke (anti-CRT in terms of the time) and very reactionary culture war turn.

deleted by creator

No, it was because they didn’t want a bordering nation to join a hostile military alliance.

Not even just changes in administration. The U.S. will often suddenly move on or just decide you will work better as a villain for internal politics. The US basically told Saddam Hussein that we wouldn’t care if he invaded Kuwait only to then use that invasion as justification to make him a boogeyman for the next decade.

Dem’s aren’t even putting in the minimum effort into pretending to be an opposition party.

They literally took Romney Care and made it worse. What are you talking about?

I think the admins just add them on their own initiative. So one of them?